New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

[Publius1787]

New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

Gerald R. Molen's latest movie titled "2016" is based on Dinesh D'Souza New York Times best-selling book [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Obamas-Rage-Dinesh-DSouza/dp/B0078XP1O2/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_3"]"Roots of Obama's Rage."[/ame] For more on this story you can go here ( [ame]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/21/oscar-winning-producer-vets-obama-2016[/ame] ) or watch the video below. One thing is for sure, however. It seems that the media’s failure to vet Obama has sparked an information and news network of its own unrivaled by liberal opposition. The more the media fails to report the truth about liberal candidates the more a conservative machine grows to fill the vacuum.

Fox News’s success was spawned from being the only cable news company that would report from a conservative point of view with both liberals and conservative politicians on air to debate the issues for balance. Now bloggers and rogue Hollywood producers are doing the job that the media refuses to do. During the 2008 campaign, we heard little to nothing about Obamas socialist background . What we did get is a slew of media personalities ignoring the history of the unknown Senator from Illinois running for president and slandering the unknown Governor of Alaska and vice presidential pick. In 2012, on the other hand, the media elites will no doubt criticize and run away from the wealth of information that they themselves failed to report. Nevertheless, it’s going to be an interesting campaign season watching Obama and his media pals defend against Obamas obvious failure of a record, Republican political attacks, and attacks from individuals like those at Breitbart.com and the likes of Gerald R. Molen & Dinesh D'Souza.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6QOscKvUjU]Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Flopper]

New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

Gerald R. Molen's latest movie titled "2016" is based on Dinesh D'Souza New York Times best-selling book "Roots of Obama's Rage." For more on this story you can go here ( http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/21/oscar-winning-producer-vets-obama-2016 ) or watch the video below. One thing is for sure, however. It seems that the media’s failure to vet Obama has sparked an information and news network of its own unrivaled by liberal opposition. The more the media fails to report the truth about liberal candidates the more a conservative machine grows to fill the vacuum.

Fox News’s success was spawned from being the only cable news company that would report from a conservative point of view with both liberals and conservative politicians on air to debate the issues for balance. Now bloggers and rogue Hollywood producers are doing the job that the media refuses to do. During the 2008 campaign, we heard little to nothing about Obamas socialist background . What we did get is a slew of media personalities ignoring the history of the unknown Senator from Illinois running for president and slandering the unknown Governor of Alaska and vice presidential pick. In 2012, on the other hand, the media elites will no doubt criticize and run away from the wealth of information that they themselves failed to report. Nevertheless, it’s going to be an interesting campaign season watching Obama and his media pals defend against Obamas obvious failure of a record, Republican political attacks, and attacks from individuals like those at Breitbart.com and the likes of Gerald R. Molen & Dinesh D'Souza.

Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016 - YouTube

Since the movie is based on Dinesh D'Souza's book, we know exactly what to expect out of the movie. D'Souza is a rabid conservative policy maker from the Reagan years, who attacks anything liberal. He's an avid supporter of intelligent design, right life, small government, anti-social welfare, etc....

 

[Publius1787]

New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

Gerald R. Molen's latest movie titled "2016" is based on Dinesh D'Souza New York Times best-selling book "Roots of Obama's Rage." For more on this story you can go here ( Oscar-Winning Producer Presents '2016': Investigative Obama Documentary ) or watch the video below. One thing is for sure, however. It seems that the media’s failure to vet Obama has sparked an information and news network of its own unrivaled by liberal opposition. The more the media fails to report the truth about liberal candidates the more a conservative machine grows to fill the vacuum.

Fox News’s success was spawned from being the only cable news company that would report from a conservative point of view with both liberals and conservative politicians on air to debate the issues for balance. Now bloggers and rogue Hollywood producers are doing the job that the media refuses to do. During the 2008 campaign, we heard little to nothing about Obamas socialist background . What we did get is a slew of media personalities ignoring the history of the unknown Senator from Illinois running for president and slandering the unknown Governor of Alaska and vice presidential pick. In 2012, on the other hand, the media elites will no doubt criticize and run away from the wealth of information that they themselves failed to report. Nevertheless, it’s going to be an interesting campaign season watching Obama and his media pals defend against Obamas obvious failure of a record, Republican political attacks, and attacks from individuals like those at Breitbart.com and the likes of Gerald R. Molen & Dinesh D'Souza.

Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016 - YouTube

Since the movie is based on Dinesh D'Souza's book, we know exactly what to expect out of the movie. D'Souza is a rabid conservative policy maker from the Reagan years, who attacks anything liberal. He's an avid supporter of intelligent design, right life, small government, anti-social welfare, etc....

I havent read his book. Explain what part you find not grounded in fact and properly sourced. Or are you conveying a guilt by association fallacy, or in you own way, stating that by virtue of being a conservative his arguements hold no water?

 

[Flopper]

New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

Gerald R. Molen's latest movie titled "2016" is based on Dinesh D'Souza New York Times best-selling book "Roots of Obama's Rage." For more on this story you can go here ( Oscar-Winning Producer Presents '2016': Investigative Obama Documentary ) or watch the video below. One thing is for sure, however. It seems that the media’s failure to vet Obama has sparked an information and news network of its own unrivaled by liberal opposition. The more the media fails to report the truth about liberal candidates the more a conservative machine grows to fill the vacuum.

Fox News’s success was spawned from being the only cable news company that would report from a conservative point of view with both liberals and conservative politicians on air to debate the issues for balance. Now bloggers and rogue Hollywood producers are doing the job that the media refuses to do. During the 2008 campaign, we heard little to nothing about Obamas socialist background . What we did get is a slew of media personalities ignoring the history of the unknown Senator from Illinois running for president and slandering the unknown Governor of Alaska and vice presidential pick. In 2012, on the other hand, the media elites will no doubt criticize and run away from the wealth of information that they themselves failed to report. Nevertheless, it’s going to be an interesting campaign season watching Obama and his media pals defend against Obamas obvious failure of a record, Republican political attacks, and attacks from individuals like those at Breitbart.com and the likes of Gerald R. Molen & Dinesh D'Souza.

Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016 - YouTube

Since the movie is based on Dinesh D'Souza's book, we know exactly what to expect out of the movie. D'Souza is a rabid conservative policy maker from the Reagan years, who attacks anything liberal. He's an avid supporter of intelligent design, right life, small government, anti-social welfare, etc....

I havent read his book. Explain what part you find not grounded in fact and properly sourced. Or are you conveying a guilt by association fallacy, or in you own way, stating that by virtue of being a conservative his arguements hold no water?

Facts, well most of the facts are quotes from Obama speech, some taken out of context in which the author attempts to justify a theory that Obama seeks to reduce American influence, strength, and our standard of living due to the influence of his father. The author relies on rather sketchy information about Obama's father and their relationship.

The facts are that Obama's father deserted the family when his son was a year old and was divorced when Barrack was only 3 years old. Obama Sr. remarried and returned to Kenya, visiting Barack in Hawaii only briefly, once in 1971. The author attempts to support his claims with Obama's autobiography, "Dreams of My Father", however reading both books you have to wonder if the D'Souza ever read Obama's book. In "Dreams of My Father", at their one meeting, Barack describes his fathers drinking habits and his arrogance and his decline from a successful academic to an object of pity. Yet the author claims that his father was the guiding influence in Barrack Obama's life, not likely.

Andrew Ferguson, a noted conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard refers to D'Souza's book as “The Roots of Lunacy.” Ferguson can’t decide if D’Souza is “a hysteric or a cynic” and lambastes him for “misstatements of fact, leaps in logic, and pointlessly elaborate argumentation.” Ilya Somin, another writer of conservative articles called D’Souza’s argument “poorly reasoned and unsupported by evidence.”

But what the hell, it's time for the election crazies in which no claims are too crazy.

Review:

 

[Publius1787]

Since the movie is based on Dinesh D'Souza's book, we know exactly what to expect out of the movie. D'Souza is a rabid conservative policy maker from the Reagan years, who attacks anything liberal. He's an avid supporter of intelligent design, right life, small government, anti-social welfare, etc....

I havent read his book. Explain what part you find not grounded in fact and properly sourced. Or are you conveying a guilt by association fallacy, or in you own way, stating that by virtue of being a conservative his arguements hold no water?

Facts, well most of the facts are quotes from Obama speech, some taken out of context in which the author attempts to justify a theory that Obama seeks to reduce American influence, strength, and our standard of living due to the influence of his father. The author relies on rather sketchy information about Obama's father and their relationship.

The facts are that Obama's father deserted the family when his son was a year old and was divorced when Barrack was only 3 years old. Obama Sr. remarried and returned to Kenya, visiting Barack in Hawaii only briefly, once in 1971. The author attempts to support his claims with Obama's autobiography, "Dreams of My Father", however reading both books you have to wonder if the D'Souza ever read Obama's book. In "Dreams of My Father", at their one meeting, Barack describes his fathers drinking habits and his arrogance and his decline from a successful academic to an object of pity. Yet the author claims that his father was the guiding influence in Barrack Obama's life, not likely.

Andrew Ferguson, a noted conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard refers to D'Souza's book as “The Roots of Lunacy.” Ferguson can’t decide if D’Souza is “a hysteric or a cynic” and lambastes him for “misstatements of fact, leaps in logic, and pointlessly elaborate argumentation.” Ilya Somin, another writer of conservative articles called D’Souza’s argument “poorly reasoned and unsupported by evidence.”

But what the hell, it's time for the election crazies in which no claims are too crazy.

Review:

Has anyone asked Obama why he named his book "Dreams of my Father?" You would figure that a socialist who practiced polygamy wouldn’t be a great reference for the name of a book. Or is such a topic off limits for liberal politicians? Of course, my question is rhetorical as Obama already told us why he named the book “Dreams of my Father” in the book itself. Which you must admit is weird in its own right once you learn who his father was. Certainly no republican could have got away from such an unreported upbringing and background.

 

[Flopper]

I havent read his book. Explain what part you find not grounded in fact and properly sourced. Or are you conveying a guilt by association fallacy, or in you own way, stating that by virtue of being a conservative his arguements hold no water?

Facts, well most of the facts are quotes from Obama speech, some taken out of context in which the author attempts to justify a theory that Obama seeks to reduce American influence, strength, and our standard of living due to the influence of his father. The author relies on rather sketchy information about Obama's father and their relationship.

The facts are that Obama's father deserted the family when his son was a year old and was divorced when Barrack was only 3 years old. Obama Sr. remarried and returned to Kenya, visiting Barack in Hawaii only briefly, once in 1971. The author attempts to support his claims with Obama's autobiography, "Dreams of My Father", however reading both books you have to wonder if the D'Souza ever read Obama's book. In "Dreams of My Father", at their one meeting, Barack describes his fathers drinking habits and his arrogance and his decline from a successful academic to an object of pity. Yet the author claims that his father was the guiding influence in Barrack Obama's life, not likely.

Andrew Ferguson, a noted conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard refers to D'Souza's book as “The Roots of Lunacy.” Ferguson can’t decide if D’Souza is “a hysteric or a cynic” and lambastes him for “misstatements of fact, leaps in logic, and pointlessly elaborate argumentation.” Ilya Somin, another writer of conservative articles called D’Souza’s argument “poorly reasoned and unsupported by evidence.”

But what the hell, it's time for the election crazies in which no claims are too crazy.

Review:

Has anyone asked Obama why he named his book "Dreams of my Father?" You would figure that a socialist who practiced polygamy wouldn’t be a great reference for the name of a book. Or is such a topic off limits for liberal politicians? Of course, my question is rhetorical as Obama already told us why he named the book “Dreams of my Father” in the book itself. Which you must admit is weird in its own right once you learn who his father was. Certainly no republican could have got away from such an unreported upbringing and background.

You're probably correct. I doubt Republican voters would have accepted a relatively poor minority canidate from a broken home with questionable linage.

When Obama wrote "Dreams of my Father", I think he was referring to his dreams of his father, not his father's dreams. Once he met his father he was clearly disappointed.

 

[Publius1787]

Facts, well most of the facts are quotes from Obama speech, some taken out of context in which the author attempts to justify a theory that Obama seeks to reduce American influence, strength, and our standard of living due to the influence of his father. The author relies on rather sketchy information about Obama's father and their relationship.

The facts are that Obama's father deserted the family when his son was a year old and was divorced when Barrack was only 3 years old. Obama Sr. remarried and returned to Kenya, visiting Barack in Hawaii only briefly, once in 1971. The author attempts to support his claims with Obama's autobiography, "Dreams of My Father", however reading both books you have to wonder if the D'Souza ever read Obama's book. In "Dreams of My Father", at their one meeting, Barack describes his fathers drinking habits and his arrogance and his decline from a successful academic to an object of pity. Yet the author claims that his father was the guiding influence in Barrack Obama's life, not likely.

Andrew Ferguson, a noted conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard refers to D'Souza's book as “The Roots of Lunacy.” Ferguson can’t decide if D’Souza is “a hysteric or a cynic” and lambastes him for “misstatements of fact, leaps in logic, and pointlessly elaborate argumentation.” Ilya Somin, another writer of conservative articles called D’Souza’s argument “poorly reasoned and unsupported by evidence.”

But what the hell, it's time for the election crazies in which no claims are too crazy.

Review:

Has anyone asked Obama why he named his book "Dreams of my Father?" You would figure that a socialist who practiced polygamy wouldn’t be a great reference for the name of a book. Or is such a topic off limits for liberal politicians? Of course, my question is rhetorical as Obama already told us why he named the book “Dreams of my Father” in the book itself. Which you must admit is weird in its own right once you learn who his father was. Certainly no republican could have got away from such an unreported upbringing and background.

You're probably correct. I doubt Republican voters would have accepted a relatively poor minority canidate from a broken home with questionable linage.

When Obama wrote "Dreams of my Father", I think he was referring to his dreams of his father, not his father's dreams. Once he met his father he was clearly disappointed.

Which begs the question of why did he write "Dreams of my Father" long after the last time he ever met his father? Its amazing how far some will go to dismiss the obvious. The fact that many minorities as a percentage of their race are poor, and therefore, vote for the party of welfare, entitlement, racial accomidation, and preference, has no bearing on how the Republicans view minorities. Just because Republicans beleive that blacks have the ability to thrive without racial accomidation and welfare doesen't absolve the democrats from being the party of perpetual black poverty. So as long as democrats can convence blacks that they cannot make it without government assistence and whiteys out to get them they can count on the black vote for years to come. Republicans have nothing to lose and everything to gain from black education and advancement.

By the way, Obama wasn't poor and lived a life of privilage with his grandparents. His mother was poor because she was a politically radical woman who had interests in muslim polygamists despite her privilaged upbringing and wouldn't risk selling out to "the man" for a stable life. Obama went to a private school and as for the rest of his education, well, thats another question the media has failed to vet. No problem doing it to Bush though.

 

[Flopper]

Has anyone asked Obama why he named his book "Dreams of my Father?" You would figure that a socialist who practiced polygamy wouldn’t be a great reference for the name of a book. Or is such a topic off limits for liberal politicians? Of course, my question is rhetorical as Obama already told us why he named the book “Dreams of my Father” in the book itself. Which you must admit is weird in its own right once you learn who his father was. Certainly no republican could have got away from such an unreported upbringing and background.

You're probably correct. I doubt Republican voters would have accepted a relatively poor minority canidate from a broken home with questionable linage.

When Obama wrote "Dreams of my Father", I think he was referring to his dreams of his father, not his father's dreams. Once he met his father he was clearly disappointed.

Which begs the question of why did he write "Dreams of my Father" long after the last time he ever met his father? Its amazing how far some will go to dismiss the obvious. The fact that many minorities as a percentage of their race are poor, and therefore, vote for the party of welfare, entitlement, racial accomidation, and preference, has no bearing on how the Republicans view minorities. Just because Republicans beleive that blacks have the ability to thrive without racial accomidation and welfare doesen't absolve the democrats from being the party of perpetual black poverty. So as long as democrats can convence blacks that they cannot make it without government assistence and whiteys out to get them they can count on the black vote for years to come. Republicans have nothing to lose and everything to gain from black education and advancement.

By the way, Obama wasn't poor and lived a life of privilage with his grandparents. His mother was poor because she was a politically radical woman who had interests in muslim polygamists despite her privilaged upbringing and wouldn't risk selling out to "the man" for a stable life. Obama went to a private school and as for the rest of his education, well, thats another question the media has failed to vet. No problem doing it to Bush though.

No, Obama did not lead a life of privilege with his grandparents. His grandfather worked in furniture stores most of his life. His grandmother held a number of jobs, waitress, sales clerk, and bank teller. She advanced to a bank vice president and retired. Neither of his grandparents could be considered wealthy. Obama lived with his grandparents only 4 years and with his mother the remainder of his childhood. He attend a college preparatory school on scholarships. He then attended Occidental College living on financial aid and summer jobs and later attended Harvard on scholarships working summers in a law office.

Did he actual write "Dreams of MY Father"? Probably, but there is no way to tell for sure. He was certainly capable of doing so. In his first jobs out of college he wrote a newsletter and wrote legal briefs. The book was published in 1995 before Obama entered politics. I didn't think the book was particular well written but fairly interesting. IMHO, I think one of the primary reasons he wrote the book was to get his rather unusual lineage and background before the public before entering politics.

 

[Katzndogz]

If someone wrote Dreams of My Father, we don't know but obama allegedly wrote Dreams FROM My Father. Allegedly because the syntax and cadence is that used by Bill Ayers. The book obama did write is his view of his father's dreams and rage. It has been brilliantly analyzed by Dinesh D'Sousa in the past and a person who has a hand in the new movie.

As far as obama's published writings. He has never published any legal writings whatsoever. As the first affirmative action editor of the Harvard Law Review, his one year is the least cited in HLR history. Even as editor he wrote nothing worth publishing even by how own rather lax standards.

Did Barack Obama publish in the Harvard law review

He he has no published legal scholarship. As he was famous for saying while president of the Harvard Law Review: "Just remember, folks, nobody reads it."

UPDATE: "Exclusive: Obama's lost law review article"

"But an unsigned - and previously unattributed - 1990 article unearthed by Politico offers a glimpse at Obama's views on abortion policy and the law during his student days, and provides a rare addition to his body of work."

Unpublished, even unsigned, and unclaimed, maybe he wrote it and was too embarasssed to say so.

 

[Flopper]

If someone wrote Dreams of My Father, we don't know but obama allegedly wrote Dreams FROM My Father. Allegedly because the syntax and cadence is that used by Bill Ayers. The book obama did write is his view of his father's dreams and rage. It has been brilliantly analyzed by Dinesh D'Sousa in the past and a person who has a hand in the new movie.

As far as obama's published writings. He has never published any legal writings whatsoever. As the first affirmative action editor of the Harvard Law Review, his one year is the least cited in HLR history. Even as editor he wrote nothing worth publishing even by how own rather lax standards.

Did Barack Obama publish in the Harvard law review

He he has no published legal scholarship. As he was famous for saying while president of the Harvard Law Review: "Just remember, folks, nobody reads it."

UPDATE: "Exclusive: Obama's lost law review article"

"But an unsigned - and previously unattributed - 1990 article unearthed by Politico offers a glimpse at Obama's views on abortion policy and the law during his student days, and provides a rare addition to his body of work."

Unpublished, even unsigned, and unclaimed, maybe he wrote it and was too embarasssed to say so.

Sorry meant From not To.

The contention is that Obama had a ghost writer and that it may have been far-left activist and admittedly former terrorist Bill Ayers (a man with no real connection to Obama, except in the kooky word of right-wing fanatics). The evidence? The book’s tone differs from the tone in Obama’s second book “The Audacity of Hope”. Obama adopted one tone because the book called for it, and 11 years later when writing a completely different book and now much older he adopted a different tone.

I would think it would be far more likely that he had help writing "Audacity of Hope" as it was written at time when he was a Senator starting his run for the presidency.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's doubtful he wrote either of his books.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What a desperate stretch for the rw's. They can't come up with anything of substance against President Obama so they keep rehashing the same fictions. That's okay though because they DO love their lies.

Is obvious, btw, that the anti-Obama folks have never ctually read one word of FACT. All they know is what faux, Cry Baby Beck, Limb-a-a-a-a tells them.

If you doubt that, just read those web sites, listen to the garbage and then read the presidents actual words.

Or don't.

Just be aware that if you do read facts, you'll have a hard time believing the shit the rw spews.

 

[Flopper]

What a desperate stretch for the rw's. They can't come up with anything of substance against President Obama so they keep rehashing the same fictions. That's okay though because they DO love their lies.

Is obvious, btw, that the anti-Obama folks have never ctually read one word of FACT. All they know is what faux, Cry Baby Beck, Limb-a-a-a-a tells them.

If you doubt that, just read those web sites, listen to the garbage and then read the presidents actual words.

Or don't.

Just be aware that if you do read facts, you'll have a hard time believing the shit the rw spews.

Truth doesn't get you elected. Good political think tanks do. Start with an accusation, one that will catch voters attention. It matters little whether there is any truth in it. As long as the accusation is repeated enough and linked to simple facts that everyone accepts, people will start to believe. Political junkies and pundits will then invent all manner of evidence that support the accusation. Unfortunately, most voters do not have the time or the desire to determine the truth.

 

[Oldstyle]

You're probably correct. I doubt Republican voters would have accepted a relatively poor minority canidate from a broken home with questionable linage.

When Obama wrote "Dreams of my Father", I think he was referring to his dreams of his father, not his father's dreams. Once he met his father he was clearly disappointed.

Which begs the question of why did he write "Dreams of my Father" long after the last time he ever met his father? Its amazing how far some will go to dismiss the obvious. The fact that many minorities as a percentage of their race are poor, and therefore, vote for the party of welfare, entitlement, racial accomidation, and preference, has no bearing on how the Republicans view minorities. Just because Republicans beleive that blacks have the ability to thrive without racial accomidation and welfare doesen't absolve the democrats from being the party of perpetual black poverty. So as long as democrats can convence blacks that they cannot make it without government assistence and whiteys out to get them they can count on the black vote for years to come. Republicans have nothing to lose and everything to gain from black education and advancement.

By the way, Obama wasn't poor and lived a life of privilage with his grandparents. His mother was poor because she was a politically radical woman who had interests in muslim polygamists despite her privilaged upbringing and wouldn't risk selling out to "the man" for a stable life. Obama went to a private school and as for the rest of his education, well, thats another question the media has failed to vet. No problem doing it to Bush though.

No, Obama did not lead a life of privilege with his grandparents. His grandfather worked in furniture stores most of his life. His grandmother held a number of jobs, waitress, sales clerk, and bank teller. She advanced to a bank vice president and retired. Neither of his grandparents could be considered wealthy. Obama lived with his grandparents only 4 years and with his mother the remainder of his childhood. He attend a college preparatory school on scholarships. He then attended Occidental College living on financial aid and summer jobs and later attended Harvard on scholarships working summers in a law office.

Did he actual write "Dreams of MY Father"? Probably, but there is no way to tell for sure. He was certainly capable of doing so. In his first jobs out of college he wrote a newsletter and wrote legal briefs. The book was published in 1995 before Obama entered politics. I didn't think the book was particular well written but fairly interesting. IMHO, I think one of the primary reasons he wrote the book was to get his rather unusual lineage and background before the public before entering politics.

He wrote the book because he had a six figure book deal to do so. Of course the book was "supposed" to be an examination of race in America but instead Barry gave them "Dreams of My Father" which is some strange semi fictional...semi factual examination of Barack's confusion about who he was. It's nice to see that he seems to have figured out who "he" is...it's just how to do the job as President that's got him stumped these days.

 

[Political Junky]

A right wing hit piece ... surprise.

 

[Oldstyle]

What a desperate stretch for the rw's. They can't come up with anything of substance against President Obama so they keep rehashing the same fictions. That's okay though because they DO love their lies.

Is obvious, btw, that the anti-Obama folks have never ctually read one word of FACT. All they know is what faux, Cry Baby Beck, Limb-a-a-a-a tells them.

If you doubt that, just read those web sites, listen to the garbage and then read the presidents actual words.

Or don't.

Just be aware that if you do read facts, you'll have a hard time believing the shit the rw spews.

Actually if you're into reading "facts", Luddly...you're probably going to struggle with "Dreams of My Father". Barry used what could generously be called "poetic license" when he describes his life. (In other words...he lied about a lot!)

 

[Flopper]

Which begs the question of why did he write "Dreams of my Father" long after the last time he ever met his father? Its amazing how far some will go to dismiss the obvious. The fact that many minorities as a percentage of their race are poor, and therefore, vote for the party of welfare, entitlement, racial accomidation, and preference, has no bearing on how the Republicans view minorities. Just because Republicans beleive that blacks have the ability to thrive without racial accomidation and welfare doesen't absolve the democrats from being the party of perpetual black poverty. So as long as democrats can convence blacks that they cannot make it without government assistence and whiteys out to get them they can count on the black vote for years to come. Republicans have nothing to lose and everything to gain from black education and advancement.

By the way, Obama wasn't poor and lived a life of privilage with his grandparents. His mother was poor because she was a politically radical woman who had interests in muslim polygamists despite her privilaged upbringing and wouldn't risk selling out to "the man" for a stable life. Obama went to a private school and as for the rest of his education, well, thats another question the media has failed to vet. No problem doing it to Bush though.

No, Obama did not lead a life of privilege with his grandparents. His grandfather worked in furniture stores most of his life. His grandmother held a number of jobs, waitress, sales clerk, and bank teller. She advanced to a bank vice president and retired. Neither of his grandparents could be considered wealthy. Obama lived with his grandparents only 4 years and with his mother the remainder of his childhood. He attend a college preparatory school on scholarships. He then attended Occidental College living on financial aid and summer jobs and later attended Harvard on scholarships working summers in a law office.

Did he actual write "Dreams of MY Father"? Probably, but there is no way to tell for sure. He was certainly capable of doing so. In his first jobs out of college he wrote a newsletter and wrote legal briefs. The book was published in 1995 before Obama entered politics. I didn't think the book was particular well written but fairly interesting. IMHO, I think one of the primary reasons he wrote the book was to get his rather unusual lineage and background before the public before entering politics.

He wrote the book because he had a six figure book deal to do so. Of course the book was "supposed" to be an examination of race in America but instead Barry gave them "Dreams of My Father" which is some strange semi fictional...semi factual examination of Barack's confusion about who he was. It's nice to see that he seems to have figured out who "he" is...it's just how to do the job as President that's got him stumped these days.

I don't think he was paid anything to write the book however he has earned more than a million in royalties.

 

[MarcATL]

The Reicht has only just BEGUN to lie!

Zeig heil!!!!

 

[gallantwarrior]

Facts, well most of the facts are quotes from Obama speech, some taken out of context in which the author attempts to justify a theory that Obama seeks to reduce American influence, strength, and our standard of living due to the influence of his father. The author relies on rather sketchy information about Obama's father and their relationship.

The facts are that Obama's father deserted the family when his son was a year old and was divorced when Barrack was only 3 years old. Obama Sr. remarried and returned to Kenya, visiting Barack in Hawaii only briefly, once in 1971. The author attempts to support his claims with Obama's autobiography, "Dreams of My Father", however reading both books you have to wonder if the D'Souza ever read Obama's book. In "Dreams of My Father", at their one meeting, Barack describes his fathers drinking habits and his arrogance and his decline from a successful academic to an object of pity. Yet the author claims that his father was the guiding influence in Barrack Obama's life, not likely.

Andrew Ferguson, a noted conservative who writes for the Weekly Standard refers to D'Souza's book as “The Roots of Lunacy.” Ferguson can’t decide if D’Souza is “a hysteric or a cynic” and lambastes him for “misstatements of fact, leaps in logic, and pointlessly elaborate argumentation.” Ilya Somin, another writer of conservative articles called D’Souza’s argument “poorly reasoned and unsupported by evidence.”

But what the hell, it's time for the election crazies in which no claims are too crazy.

Review:

Has anyone asked Obama why he named his book "Dreams of my Father?" You would figure that a socialist who practiced polygamy wouldn’t be a great reference for the name of a book. Or is such a topic off limits for liberal politicians? Of course, my question is rhetorical as Obama already told us why he named the book “Dreams of my Father” in the book itself. Which you must admit is weird in its own right once you learn who his father was. Certainly no republican could have got away from such an unreported upbringing and background.

You're probably correct. I doubt Republican voters would have accepted a relatively poor minority canidate from a broken home with questionable linage.

When Obama wrote "Dreams of my Father", I think he was referring to his dreams of his father, not his father's dreams. Once he met his father he was clearly disappointed.

It should be admitted that the sperm-donor referred to in the book's title did indeed impart the one advantage that has carried Barry as far as he has come in politics.

 

[rdean]

New Anti-Obama Documentary by Oscar Winning Producer Coming this Summer.

Gerald R. Molen's latest movie titled "2016" is based on Dinesh D'Souza New York Times best-selling book "Roots of Obama's Rage." For more on this story you can go here ( Oscar-Winning Producer Presents '2016': Investigative Obama Documentary ) or watch the video below. One thing is for sure, however. It seems that the media’s failure to vet Obama has sparked an information and news network of its own unrivaled by liberal opposition. The more the media fails to report the truth about liberal candidates the more a conservative machine grows to fill the vacuum.

Fox News’s success was spawned from being the only cable news company that would report from a conservative point of view with both liberals and conservative politicians on air to debate the issues for balance. Now bloggers and rogue Hollywood producers are doing the job that the media refuses to do. During the 2008 campaign, we heard little to nothing about Obamas socialist background . What we did get is a slew of media personalities ignoring the history of the unknown Senator from Illinois running for president and slandering the unknown Governor of Alaska and vice presidential pick. In 2012, on the other hand, the media elites will no doubt criticize and run away from the wealth of information that they themselves failed to report. Nevertheless, it’s going to be an interesting campaign season watching Obama and his media pals defend against Obamas obvious failure of a record, Republican political attacks, and attacks from individuals like those at Breitbart.com and the likes of Gerald R. Molen & Dinesh D'Souza.

Dinesh D'Souza - Obama & 2016 - YouTube

Why does the "conservative" view always include so many lies? Doesn't matter if it's Iraq, science, Obama, history. As far as "Fox", it's the only organization that has sued for the "right to lie" that I know of.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/media/214797-bill-press-author-of-the-obama-hate-machine.html